Tuesday’s special City Council meeting may have lasted slightly over 10 minutes, but there were enough political subplots and undercurrents to fill several news stories.
On the surface, the special meeting was called to introduce amendments to the city’s budget. Only six members of the nine-member council were present. The three biggest critics of Mayor David Roberts’ administration boycotted the meeting and decried that it was illegal and hasty call for solely political reasons.
At the meeting the council introduced four amendments to add revenue to the 2003-2004 fiscal year budget. The amendments raised the budget from $57.4 million to $59.9 million. According to city Business Administrator Robert Drasheff, the $2.5 million increase is due to new revenue from two liquidated funds and savings from a pension refinancing bond issue the council approved a couple of months ago. Another “special meeting” has been called for Oct. 27 at 7 p.m. at City Hall to hold a public hearing and vote on the amendments, and, most likely adopt the budget.
“It was the goal of this council to maintain the level of services that the city’s residents are used to,” said Drasheff in a statement. He added the second goal of the council was to use the new revenue to mitigate $2.7 million in proposed layoffs. According to an earlier statement, that could have been over 100 jobs. But with the amendments, according to Drasheff, that number is closer to “four to five” employees that could lose their jobs. According to City Council President Ruben Ramos Jr., the handful of employees that might be fired would only be fired because they “are not properly performing up to task.”
Councilman Richard DelBoccio said after the meeting he is proud of the budget that was presented Tuesday.
“This is a good budget that is result of a lot of hard work and teamwork,” said DelBoccio. “It maintains the tax rate at $7.84 [per $1000 of assessed property value] for the ninth straight year but continues to provide the high level of services that our residents have come to expect. And to top it off, we were able to do it without a significant amount of layoffs.”
Political subplots
Just under the surface of Tuesday’s meeting was a host of interesting dynamics. First, Tony Soares, Theresa Castellano and Carol Marsh, the mayor’s opposition on the council, boycotted the meeting for both political and legal reasons. Legally, the trio said they believed the meeting was called without proper notice.
They added that none of them had received any details or documentation about the amendments before the meeting was to be held. City Attorney Joseph Sherman said the meeting was legal and that if any member of the public or the council believes otherwise they have the option of taking their case before a judge.
In a written statement, the three boycotting council members expressed their reasons for missing the meeting. “This meeting is unnecessary, ill-conceived, and designed to hastily conduct the city’s business with an appointed councilman as the deciding vote, before the people of the 3rd Ward have a chance to elect a replacement to fill the seat to which [Anthony] Russo was elected.”
To understand the context it is important to know that a special election to fill the 3rd Ward Council seat vacated by the resignation of Russo is scheduled for Nov. 4. In that election, the mayor’s candidate and interim Councilman Vincent Addeo is running against Russo’s son, Michael, who is supported by Marsh, Soares and Castellano. Also running as an independent is former Councilwoman Roseanne Andreula.
The next regularly scheduled meeting is slated for Nov. 5, which happens to be one day after the elections.
Roberts’ critics charge that the administration called this “special” meeting in order to grab headlines two weeks before Election Day. Also by holding the special meeting before the election, the mayor’s supported candidate, Addeo, can vote on budget appropriations.
“This leaves us to believe the mayor is ‘playing politics,’ ” the critics wrote in their statement, “rushing the matter to a vote that would not be approved if consideration were delayed until the results of the Nov. 4 special election were known.”
Roberts responds
An irate Roberts blasted the boycotters Wednesday saying they are shirking the elected duties by not showing up to the meeting. “You don’t leave your post,” said Roberts. “The most important thing you do as a city legislator is participate in the oversight and adoption of the budget. They should have had the guts to show up. They have ducked the public and ducked their responsibility.”
He added that throughout the budget process his critics have been “quick with rhetoric” and “one-liners” but have not offered “constructive criticism” when it comes to the budget.
Soares responded that he has made recommendations, but they have fallen on deaf ears. He said he has proposed a hiring freeze, reducing the amount of professional service contracts and has called for an increase in development fees.
Soares added he and Marsh have been shut out of the decision making process and rarely get their phone calls returned by the administration. Soares also said Roberts’ is being duplicitous when it comes to the city finances.
“The mayor has a bad case of Munchausen Syndrome [by proxy],” said Soares. “It’s his [fiscal] policy and spending practices that is making the city sick and has put city workers’ jobs in jeopardy. Then all of the sudden he calls the ‘special’ meeting to announce that their jobs have been saved and declares himself a hero. The reality of the situation is [Roberts] wanted to scare the employees and now he wants to win them over to his side.” Sidebar:
Hoboken denied Extraordinary State Aid
The state has denied the city’s request to receive about $1 million in Extraordinary Aid. Hoboken was one of only three municipalities statewide that were denied aid; the others are Union Beach and Vineland.
Several months ago Hoboken applied for $1 million in Extraordinary State Aid. The Department of Community Affair’s Extraordinary Aid Program is implemented through the Division of Local Government Services. Last year the city applied for $4 million in Extraordinary Aid and received $500,000. According to the state’s web site, Extraordinary State Aid goes to municipalities that demonstrate, despite their efforts to provide property tax savings for current and future budget years, they have experienced circumstances that are beyond their control and warrant aid.
E.J. Miranda, a spokesman for the state’s Department of Community Affairs, said the aid was denied because Hoboken’s $57.4 million proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year doesn’t contain a property tax increase.
At the City Council meeting Tuesday night, Councilman Michael Cricco said that it was not fair Hoboken is “being punished” for working hard to create a “tight” budget that doesn’t increase taxes. “I’m a little bit upset that we didn’t get these discretionary funds,” said Cricco.
He added that because the city didn’t raise taxes, that should not be an acceptable rationale for denying aid. At the Nov. 5 council meeting, Cricco will introduce a resolution that will be sent to the governor asking him to reconsider.
Roberts said more than just taxes should be taken into account when giving out Extraordinary State Aid. He added that there “should be some allowances” for the fact that Hoboken is a “regional transportation hub,” and that the city has to absorb the costs associated with the thousands of commuters that come into the city daily.
“Of course we are very disappointed that the state used a very strict interpretation and ruled that Hoboken wasn’t eligible,” said Roberts.